[Skip to Navigation]
October 1961


Author Affiliations

V.A. Hospital 130 W. Knightsbridge Rd. Bronx 68, N.Y.

Arch Ophthalmol. 1961;66(4):606-608. doi:10.1001/archopht.1961.00960010607027

To the Editor:  —Ultrasonic interpretation is the crux of the issue between Drs. Oksala and Lehtinen, and us. Drs. Oksala and Lehtinen advocate the use of an isolated TAU which yields graphs, Figure 1, p. 353 (Arch. Ophthal. 65:353, 1961). We oppose the adoption of this technique for general clinical diagnosis because it is impossible to establish uniform interpretative criteria with the data obtained by TAU, since every minor alteration of the transducer tissue geometry produces major changes in the TAU pattern (reference; Figure 3, p. 355, and Figure 4, p. 356 of the above article). Because of the infinite number of patterns produced by TAU, the graphs may be meaningful to the individual examiner, but cannot be interpreted by others. In contrast, cross-sections obtained by IMU may be viewed by any ophthalmologist, and a total retinal detachment could readily be identified as such. Granted that finer points of interpretation

Add or change institution